Reggie white and many other big time FA did a tour then decided right? Manning an exception. Not many big time QBS ever hit the FA market. The usually get traded at end of the career etc etc. Or just are so washed up its not a big circus.

You want to use Reggie White as an example? The guy that got the Jets to trade for a has been Boomer Esiason on his say so during a visit before signing with Green Bay?

Free Agents may not always sign with the first team they visit, but they almost always sign with the last. Usually the deal gets done during the visit, not after they have had time to go home and mull it over.

I'm looking for the Bronco equivalencies for Wayne, Harrison, Garcon and Clark, James, Glenn, Freeney, Sanders, Brackett and Saturday on the Broncos roster...crazy, but I'm not seeing them.

Dumervil? Champ? Von?

We have a number of quality players ourselves, we did go the playoffs last year you know.

You can bet that the offensive line will all of a sudden look a hell of a lot better with Manning changing the protections at the line and making quick reads and throws, and that our receivers will magically look significantly improved with him throwing the ball to them.

If he's healthy and we can add a few solid pieces to the D in FA then we're good enough to seriously contend IMO.

I think there are like 10-12 TE in this years draft. So I don't think that we're going after TE this year. Also just because Tebow didn't throw to the TE a lot this year doesn't mean they suck. I agree with you that this team has a lot of holes, but going through FA to fix all of them is a mistake also, look at the Eagles.

How about when they were replaced by OLinemen because they can't block. Did that make them suck?

Such a silly perspective. Takes not only being good to win a championship, but you also need some luck. You have to be able to compete in the playoffs to have a chance at a championship. With a healthy Manning and some other improvements that's what this team should be able to do.

Such a silly perspective. Takes not only being good to win a championship, but you also need some luck. You have to be able to compete in the playoffs to have a chance at a championship. With a healthy Manning and some other improvements that's what this team should be able to do.

Yeah, the idea that you HAVE to win the Super Bowl or it's a failure is nonsense. What if we trade Tebow to Jacksonville, and he totally flames out? Then, if nothing else, we would have saved ourselves at least one wasted season with Tebow and given ourselves the best chance possible to compete. There are any number of scenarios that will determine whether or not this was a worthwhile move. The move could prove to be a bad one. But to say the only acceptable outcome is a Super Bowl win or it's a failure independent of other factors is incredibly myopic and, as you said, silly.

Such a silly perspective. Takes not only being good to win a championship, but you also need some luck. You have to be able to compete in the playoffs to have a chance at a championship. With a healthy Manning and some other improvements that's what this team should be able to do.

No, that's EXACTLY why this is being done, isn't it? Why are we bringing him in then? Because he gives us a better chance? Sorry, not worth it if that's the case.

If you're going to trade a young QB, start signing free agents and go in win now mode, you better win now. I can see where this is heading though.

Yup, as if going 10-6 with Manning and winning a playoff game would be a "failure", but going 6-10 with Tebow would somehow be a "success". Superior logic at work.

Right, because signing a 36 year old QB with an injury history to a team full of holes, discarding your own philosophy of building through the draft, spending on FA to win now, it would be a huge success to go 10-6 and win a playoff game.

We won a playoff game last year and people can't stop apologizing for it. Why should it be considered better if Manning does it?

Yup, as if going 10-6 with Manning and winning a playoff game would be a "failure", but going 6-10 with Tebow would somehow be a "success". Superior logic at work.

I don't think anyone would consider 6-10 with Tebow "success". But if we're mortgaging the future for Manning (which getting rid of Tebow is in fact doing just that) then you expect some tangible benefits in return.

Tebow led the team to 8-8 and a playoff win last year with only 11 regular season starts. I won't consider his 2012 campaign a success unless we still win the division (so likely going at least 9-7 or 10-6, since 8-8 barely did it on a tie breaker last year) and have at least a competitive outing in the playoffs. Maybe we lose round one but we shouldn't be getting smoked anymore like New England did last year. From there the expectations keep building and within three years we should consider ourselves within reach (i.e. getting some breaks) of the SB.

With Manning we need to do better than 9-7/10-6 and we need to start winning playoff games quickly because the window of being an elite team is far smaller. If the whole point is to speed up the team's growth towards being a top tier competitor at the expense of long term viability then it makes complete sense to have two different standards for the short term.

We should be expected to be a realistic contender for a Superbowl with Manning.

If he plays here three years and we make the playoffs three times, lose in the Superbowl once and lose a couple of divisional round games then you can't criticise the move because it put us in there with a shot.

Lots of good teams in the NFL every year, only one trophy to go round. They aren't easy to win.

The tangible benefits include increasing our chances of winning a SB, and possibly drawing in some superior talent (compared to what we have). There is no sure thing in the NFL, and it's unrealistic to expect a SB win with Manning. Increased odds is all you can shoot for. And I think most, except idiots like Mcgruder, realize that Manning is a huge boost for the offense, as long as he stays healthy.

The tangible benefits include increasing our chances of winning a SB, and possibly drawing in some superior talent (compared to what we have). There is no sure thing in the NFL, and it's unrealistic to expect a SB win with Manning. Increased odds is all you can shoot for.

^ Perfectly stated. They're putting more bullets in the gun, but there's not guarantee of hitting the target. Just more chances.

The Broncos are only a realistic Super Bowl if with Manning as long as they fix the other problem areas on the team. OL, more depth at RB and WR, a pass catching TE, as well as DT, MLB, probably OLB, CB, and likely another safety. If they can fix those with genuine talent and not just recycled crap like has been tried in the past, then I can see the possibilities.

11-5 to match Tim's % last season... And a playoff win. Likely with a worse team (saying this years would more than likely be far superior in talent)

...That's just to MATCH mind you...

It would really depend on what happened with Tim. If, for instance, he got traded to Jacksonville and played poorly, then most people would probably regard his 2011 success as a fluke, and it could be safely assumed that whatever result achieved with Manning would be better than any that would have been had with Tebow. Of course, if Tim established himself as an elite QB, or even a really good one, that would increase what we would need to achieve with Manning in order for it to be regarded as a success. On the other hand, if we actually keep Tebow, I don't see where there is much downside. To me, it all would center on what happens with Tebow.

Yeah, the idea that you HAVE to win the Super Bowl or it's a failure is nonsense. What if we trade Tebow to Jacksonville, and he totally flames out? Then, if nothing else, we would have saved ourselves at least one wasted season with Tebow and given ourselves the best chance possible to compete. There are any number of scenarios that will determine whether or not this was a worthwhile move. The move could prove to be a bad one. But to say the only acceptable outcome is a Super Bowl win or it's a failure independent of other factors is incredibly myopic and, as you said, silly.

It is super bowl, or its a failure, because Denver is scrapping the supposed "build through the Draft" plan to contending that Elway said he would follow.

Manning will only come here if he thinks he can go to and WIN a superbowl in the next few years. Elway is telling him that "I've been there...done that, and at the same age. I can get you there and will get you what you need!"

That means bringing in a lot of FA pickups in areas where we are not at strength. Manning isn't an idiot...he is a coach on the field and has looked at film of last years Broncos. He probably will give Elway a list of positions that he needs to see better players at to come here, and Elway and co have to promise him they'll get them.

It scraps our current plan and puts a premium on win now! We won't have 2-3 years to develope draft picks. That is why its super bowl or FAIL.

And if we don't get there, and then Manning retires or is hurt, we have Mannings team, which may be better...or may not since he has a unique skill set that requires a QB like him to take advantage of.

How many top draft picks did Indy use at QB while PM was there and playing? How many will he let Elway use to bring in his eventual replacement?

This is handing the Team to PM. When he is gone we will be facing the same thing Indy did this year.

It is super bowl, or its a failure, because Denver is scrapping the supposed "build through the Draft" plan to contending that Elway said he would follow.

Manning will only come here if he thinks he can go to and WIN a superbowl in the next few years. Elway is telling him that "I've been there...done that, and at the same age. I can get you there and will get you what you need!"

That means bringing in a lot of FA pickups in areas where we are not at strength. Manning isn't an idiot...he is a coach on the field and has looked at film of last years Broncos. He probably will give Elway a list of positions that he needs to see better players at to come here, and Elway and co have to promise him they'll get them.

It scraps our current plan and puts a premium on win now! We won't have 2-3 years to develope draft picks. That is why its super bowl or FAIL.

And if we don't get there, and then Manning retires or is hurt, we have Mannings team, which may be better...or may not since he has a unique skill set that requires a QB like him to take advantage of.

How many top draft picks did Indy use at QB while PM was there and playing? How many will he let Elway use to bring in his evetual replacement?

Thsi is handing the Team to PM. When he is gone we will be facing the same thing Indy did this year.

Psssht. Pfffft.

Selling your soul for a 2 year playoff window doesn't mean you should actually deliver in that window, fool. Only that you should bet the farm and then give it the good ol' college try.

At least an AFC Championship or this would be looked at universally as an abject failure. Although I personally wouldn't trade our current youth and cap space for one Lamar Hunt trophy.

Football is entertainment first and foremost. People who would trade a potential for say 8 years of exciting football for 1 2nd place trophy are beyond my ability to rationalize.

It is super bowl, or its a failure, because Denver is scrapping the supposed "build through the Draft" plan to contending that Elway said he would follow.

Manning will only come here if he thinks he can go to and WIN a superbowl in the next few years. Elway is telling him that "I've been there...done that, and at the same age. I can get you there and will get you what you need!"

That means bringing in a lot of FA pickups in areas where we are not at strength. Manning isn't an idiot...he is a coach on the field and has looked at film of last years Broncos. He probably will give Elway a list of positions that he needs to see better players at to come here, and Elway and co have to promise him they'll get them.

It scraps our current plan and puts a premium on win now! We won't have 2-3 years to develope draft picks. That is why its super bowl or FAIL.

And if we don't get there, and then Manning retires or is hurt, we have Mannings team, which may be better...or may not since he has a unique skill set that requires a QB like him to take advantage of.

How many top draft picks did Indy use at QB while PM was there and playing? How many will he let Elway use to bring in his eventual replacement?

This is handing the Team to PM. When he is gone we will be facing the same thing Indy did this year.

Who says that we can't still build through the draft if we sign Manning? The two are not necessarily mutually exclusive. If we go out and sign a bunch of guys over 30 and trade away draft picks along with signing Manning, then you will have a point. But what if we sign productive but younger free agents (i.e. Ben Grubbs, Mike Tolbert, Pierre Garcon, just for a few examples of the younger, quality players available) and keep all of our draft picks? Assuming that the overall building plan will be abandoned if we sign Manning is not at all a certainity.

Who says that we can't still build through the draft if we sign Manning? The two are not necessarily mutually exclusive. If we go out and sign a bunch of guys over 30 and trade away draft picks along with signing Manning, then you will have a point. But what if we sign productive but younger free agents (i.e. Ben Grubbs, Mike Tolbert, Pierre Garcon, just for a few examples of the younger, quality players available) and keep all of our draft picks? Assuming that the overall building plan will be abandoned if we sign Manning is not at all a certainity.

I know one thing that isn't a good start. Signing a bunch of guys on their last legs who eat up a quarter of your salary cap. Manning in the high-teens to low twenties, plus Wayne and Clark would be disastrous to this team long term.